Substitute http, or ssh, or telnet for VOIP and see how fast the ISP get's condemned.
Then substitute blocking say, Google's http traffic on MSN's network because MSN has a search feature now that they want their users to use... can you see how this can quickly lead to an ISP going down the drain when other's retaliate?
Are you really getting "Internet" access from the cable provider now? Sound like some of AOL's problems? At least AOL doesn't selectively prevent their customers from accessing their competitors.
Many cable companies have a government granted monopoly on cable internet access for these customers. Should they really ban their customers from say, accessing dishnetwork's site because they're a competitor?
It's like Microsoft making a mod to the DNS resolution in windows to keep people from accessing any Linux promoting websites. Would you be up in arms over that?
If an ISP's contract with their customers prohibit's a protocol, then fine, but someone with a government monopoly to provide a service (in this case, cable internet) shouldn't be able to put restrictions banning their customers from accessing their unrelated competitor on that service.
Of course, the problem with the cable companies has always been their government monopoly status. Thank goodness for DSL and satellite dishes allowing for a little relief lately.
How do Slashdot readers make international calls?"
Usually when they are calling a tech support toll free number for a hardware or software product and the call center is on the other side of the world....
Does anyone think that the Sci Fi channel will ever get actual decent Sci Fi authors to do their scripts and come up with series for them?
It's one thing to be low-budget in production (the original Star Trek was about as low budget as Sci Fi comes), but they could at least make an attempt to get decent writers. Someone should explain to them that people who watch/read a lot of Science Fiction are more interested in a decent scientific plot instead of their writer's latest flavor-of-the-week politically-correct-philosophy with "futuristic" stuff tacked on. I can think of at least three recent "original series" that may have been a series, but were original in all the wrong ways.
USA has better "Sci Fi" original series than the Sci Fi channel. What's up with that?
Well, in this particular case, Bush has publicly stated that he is in favor of a permanent ban on internet taxes, so it's not really surprising he'd sign the bill.
Get a Pronto universal touch screen remote. Get the recharger base and an RF extender.
Get someone who knows what they are doing to program it for you, unless you want to spend 4-8 hours doing it yourself. You can download other people's configs off the net, but no one is going to upload a config with the exact set of equipment that you have.
In the end you'll have one remote that can control everything and uses RF so you don't need line of sight. It will also have one-button macros for whatever you want, like sending all the codes necessary for you to switch to a DVD, for example. You can program the touch screen to put whatever buttons or combination of buttons you want wherever you want, on multiple screens with custom graphics, even.
There's your solution. The problem that hasn't been solved for the non-techies is having to pay someone else to set it all up for them.
Have you analyzed the statistics on private charity in the United States with an eye towards historical values and trends and compared it to government welfare?
Are you familiar with any of the large private welfare systems currently in existence?
The facts don't back up your contentions. The reality is that private individuals are more generous than you think and that private, voluntary charity is much more efficient and accomplishes more in actual help for people than government, coerced welfare programs.
The U.S. government's "War on poverty" has done more to cause poverty in the U.S. over the last 40 years than any other single cause.
Yes, it's clear that you don't believe in private property rights.
When a group comes and takes your personal wealth and possesions using the threat of imprisonment or death, most of the rest of us in the english speaking world that stealing.
It doesn't make any difference what it is that the people stealing have decided that they "deserve" the product of your labor more than you do.
Although you claim to reject the "might makes right" philosophy, the only reason your group can steal from minorities is because their numbers give them might. They have NO moral right to steal.
What you are describing is the end of a Democracy. The end is when the people figure out that they can "vote themselves bread and circuses out of the public purse", to throw in a very old, but relevent quote.
Happily, even though it's hanging by a thread, the U.S.A. still has a republic (not a democracy) with a constitution that still partially protects our rights from people like you.
Just because a group of people (the middle class in your example) has the power to steal at gunpoint from a smaller group of people doesn't make it morally right. If you think it does, then let a group of thieves know your home address and they'll come over and demonstrate why you are wrong.
But then, I suppose that someone with your opinions puts more faith in platitutes like "might makes right" rather then any sort of bourgeois morality.
The management over at Aluria has become more and more unresponsive in the last couple of months. After this latest news, I've finally had to remove them completely from my brief list of anti-spyware software.
Does anyone have a good free spyware removal tool I can add to my list? Most of the current "free" ones do ok at detection (although many aren't any better than the free tool on the page above), but refuse to remove anything because they want you to buy the removal version instead.
In any case, Aluria's product was fairly easy to use, but dropping the detection of WhenU is just too much. They already were missing a couple of parasites that a better product like PestControl caught just fine, so i wonder if this isn't the first time for something like this.
Well, if you compare his site to RealClearPolitics, you'll notice the wide divergence between them, his site showing a much larger bias towards Kerry.
I'd guess that he thinks that showing Kerry with an imaginary big lead in the electoral college will make him more likely to win.
IMHO, that's mostly wishful thinking, but a lot of newspaper polls do essentially the same thing. The main paper in Minnesota hasn't been within 10 points of predicting the vote there in probably 30 years, but they keep publishing polls election cycle after election cycle that show the Democrats unrealisticaly way ahead every time. They must have some reason for it.
According to the article, it's an online game and one of the developers made a plot character that refused to trade with women, calling them slaves, etc...
Apparently he just wanted to bring out the fact that in ancient egypt, the role of women wasn't exactly like it is today, but a bunch of women are standing on their "right not to be offended by anyone, even in a game" and quitting.
First off, I agree with you about the economic distorting affects of the income tax. Have you researched the Fair Tax?
But the EPI contention doesn't hold water when exposed to simple standard of living facts reported by the census bureau.
The basic problem is that EPI is focused on dollar amounts and not standard of living. Surely it's crazy to say that since many Americans own multiple TVs in 2004 and didn't in the 60s, that a family is somehow more poor now because they can only afford one TV vs. if they could only afford one TV in the 60s.
As the nation as a whole gets wealthier in material terms, trying to say that someone is poorer relative to the rest of the country, rather then richer relative to how someone at that income level used to live is ridiculous.
You do realize that relative to much of the rest of the world, most "poor" Americans are among the super wealthy, right? The term ends up being all relative to what you are comparing to.
A comparison of the same "poor" people in the U.S over time leads to the conclusion that they are getting richer, not poorer, regardless of how many less tvs and cars they have than other people who are also getting richer.
Your constant equation of sex with race and color doesn't work. If that's your only argument (to misquote me), then you have no argument. Race and color aren't inherent in the definition of marriage.
Equal protection under the law means that the law applies to everyone in the same way. Marriage laws apply to everyone in the same way. As I stated earlier, homosexuals are currently allowed to marry under the law in the _exact_ same way as non-homosexuals are, so there is no equal protection issue.
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but gender isn't mentioned anywhere in the United States Constitution.
I'm personally of the opinion that the government at all levels should stay completely out of regulating marriage and leave it to private individuals, contracts and churches to sort it all out, but that doesn't change the current reality that a law mentioning male or female in it's text doesn't make it unconstitutional.
There aren't any laws on the books prohibiting homosexuals from marrying. Their biggest problem is convincing someone of the opposite gender to agree to marry them. If they can do that, they can get married just like anyone else.
What they're looking to do is to change the definition of what a marriage is. The definition for a very long time has had a male/female sexual and family relationship at it's heart.
"This time I'm voting Kerry for several reasons. He seems much more centrist, so hopefully he can unite the majorly partisan congress."
Ummmm.... you missed the part where Kerry has been rated the most liberal senator of them all, right?
Please, don't judge a politician on what they say to get elected in an election year, especially Kerry, who seems to change his public positions based on the wind and which state he's in.
Judge them on how they actually vote. By those standards, you probably like Kerry better (based on your expressed views), but he can in no way be called a "centrist".
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with British media women is the same as the reason the British download the most TV.
The government monopoly BBC mostly sucks without a lot of choices.
Wither hast thou gone, Monty Python?
Wasted resources aren't "good for the economy". See Capitalism and the broken window fallacy.
Substitute http, or ssh, or telnet for VOIP and see how fast the ISP get's condemned.
Then substitute blocking say, Google's http traffic on MSN's network because MSN has a search feature now that they want their users to use... can you see how this can quickly lead to an ISP going down the drain when other's retaliate?
Are you really getting "Internet" access from the cable provider now? Sound like some of AOL's problems? At least AOL doesn't selectively prevent their customers from accessing their competitors.
Many cable companies have a government granted monopoly on cable internet access for these customers. Should they really ban their customers from say, accessing dishnetwork's site because they're a competitor?
It's like Microsoft making a mod to the DNS resolution in windows to keep people from accessing any Linux promoting websites. Would you be up in arms over that?
If an ISP's contract with their customers prohibit's a protocol, then fine, but someone with a government monopoly to provide a service (in this case, cable internet) shouldn't be able to put restrictions banning their customers from accessing their unrelated competitor on that service.
Of course, the problem with the cable companies has always been their government monopoly status. Thank goodness for DSL and satellite dishes allowing for a little relief lately.
"New stem cell harvesting was outlawed in the USA ..."
The federal government decided not to fund harvesting new stem cells. That's a far cry from "outlawed".
Anyone with the expertise can harvest new stem cells legally in the US, the Feds just won't be giving them grant money to do it.
It's too bad whoever wrote the story didn't even bother to read a couple of paragraphs into their own linked text.
How do Slashdot readers make international calls?"
Usually when they are calling a tech support toll free number for a hardware or software product and the call center is on the other side of the world....
So, that answer'd be "using a speakerphone?"
Does anyone think that the Sci Fi channel will ever get actual decent Sci Fi authors to do their scripts and come up with series for them?
It's one thing to be low-budget in production (the original Star Trek was about as low budget as Sci Fi comes), but they could at least make an attempt to get decent writers. Someone should explain to them that people who watch/read a lot of Science Fiction are more interested in a decent scientific plot instead of their writer's latest flavor-of-the-week politically-correct-philosophy with "futuristic" stuff tacked on. I can think of at least three recent "original series" that may have been a series, but were original in all the wrong ways.
USA has better "Sci Fi" original series than the Sci Fi channel. What's up with that?
Well, in this particular case, Bush has publicly stated that he is in favor of a permanent ban on internet taxes, so it's not really surprising he'd sign the bill.
Get a Pronto universal touch screen remote. Get the recharger base and an RF extender.
Get someone who knows what they are doing to program it for you, unless you want to spend 4-8 hours doing it yourself. You can download other people's configs off the net, but no one is going to upload a config with the exact set of equipment that you have.
In the end you'll have one remote that can control everything and uses RF so you don't need line of sight. It will also have one-button macros for whatever you want, like sending all the codes necessary for you to switch to a DVD, for example. You can program the touch screen to put whatever buttons or combination of buttons you want wherever you want, on multiple screens with custom graphics, even.
There's your solution. The problem that hasn't been solved for the non-techies is having to pay someone else to set it all up for them.
Have you analyzed the statistics on private charity in the United States with an eye towards historical values and trends and compared it to government welfare?
Are you familiar with any of the large private welfare systems currently in existence?
The facts don't back up your contentions. The reality is that private individuals are more generous than you think and that private, voluntary charity is much more efficient and accomplishes more in actual help for people than government, coerced welfare programs.
The U.S. government's "War on poverty" has done more to cause poverty in the U.S. over the last 40 years than any other single cause.
Yes, it's clear that you don't believe in private property rights.
When a group comes and takes your personal wealth and possesions using the threat of imprisonment or death, most of the rest of us in the english speaking world that stealing.
It doesn't make any difference what it is that the people stealing have decided that they "deserve" the product of your labor more than you do.
Although you claim to reject the "might makes right" philosophy, the only reason your group can steal from minorities is because their numbers give them might. They have NO moral right to steal.
What you are describing is the end of a Democracy. The end is when the people figure out that they can "vote themselves bread and circuses out of the public purse", to throw in a very old, but relevent quote.
Happily, even though it's hanging by a thread, the U.S.A. still has a republic (not a democracy) with a constitution that still partially protects our rights from people like you.
Just because a group of people (the middle class in your example) has the power to steal at gunpoint from a smaller group of people doesn't make it morally right. If you think it does, then let a group of thieves know your home address and they'll come over and demonstrate why you are wrong.
But then, I suppose that someone with your opinions puts more faith in platitutes like "might makes right" rather then any sort of bourgeois morality.
No, today they're the good pawn of the Republican Party. Don't worry, in a story tommorow they'll be the evil pawn again.
The management over at Aluria has become more and more unresponsive in the last couple of months. After this latest news, I've finally had to remove them completely from my brief list of anti-spyware software.
Does anyone have a good free spyware removal tool I can add to my list? Most of the current "free" ones do ok at detection (although many aren't any better than the free tool on the page above), but refuse to remove anything because they want you to buy the removal version instead.
In any case, Aluria's product was fairly easy to use, but dropping the detection of WhenU is just too much. They already were missing a couple of parasites that a better product like PestControl caught just fine, so i wonder if this isn't the first time for something like this.
Well, if you compare his site to RealClearPolitics, you'll notice the wide divergence between them, his site showing a much larger bias towards Kerry.
I'd guess that he thinks that showing Kerry with an imaginary big lead in the electoral college will make him more likely to win.
IMHO, that's mostly wishful thinking, but a lot of newspaper polls do essentially the same thing. The main paper in Minnesota hasn't been within 10 points of predicting the vote there in probably 30 years, but they keep publishing polls election cycle after election cycle that show the Democrats unrealisticaly way ahead every time. They must have some reason for it.
Nice try at being funny.
According to the article, it's an online game and one of the developers made a plot character that refused to trade with women, calling them slaves, etc...
Apparently he just wanted to bring out the fact that in ancient egypt, the role of women wasn't exactly like it is today, but a bunch of women are standing on their "right not to be offended by anyone, even in a game" and quitting.
Right, because it would have been so much more realistic for them to portray ancient egypt as "gender-neutral", right?
Maybe they were just going for authenticity?
First off, I agree with you about the economic distorting affects of the income tax. Have you researched the Fair Tax?
But the EPI contention doesn't hold water when exposed to simple standard of living facts reported by the census bureau.
The basic problem is that EPI is focused on dollar amounts and not standard of living. Surely it's crazy to say that since many Americans own multiple TVs in 2004 and didn't in the 60s, that a family is somehow more poor now because they can only afford one TV vs. if they could only afford one TV in the 60s.
As the nation as a whole gets wealthier in material terms, trying to say that someone is poorer relative to the rest of the country, rather then richer relative to how someone at that income level used to live is ridiculous.
You do realize that relative to much of the rest of the world, most "poor" Americans are among the super wealthy, right? The term ends up being all relative to what you are comparing to.
A comparison of the same "poor" people in the U.S over time leads to the conclusion that they are getting richer, not poorer, regardless of how many less tvs and cars they have than other people who are also getting richer.
Your constant equation of sex with race and color doesn't work. If that's your only argument (to misquote me), then you have no argument. Race and color aren't inherent in the definition of marriage.
Equal protection under the law means that the law applies to everyone in the same way. Marriage laws apply to everyone in the same way. As I stated earlier, homosexuals are currently allowed to marry under the law in the _exact_ same way as non-homosexuals are, so there is no equal protection issue.
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but gender isn't mentioned anywhere in the United States Constitution.
I'm personally of the opinion that the government at all levels should stay completely out of regulating marriage and leave it to private individuals, contracts and churches to sort it all out, but that doesn't change the current reality that a law mentioning male or female in it's text doesn't make it unconstitutional.
There aren't any laws on the books prohibiting homosexuals from marrying. Their biggest problem is convincing someone of the opposite gender to agree to marry them. If they can do that, they can get married just like anyone else.
What they're looking to do is to change the definition of what a marriage is. The definition for a very long time has had a male/female sexual and family relationship at it's heart.
To put your numbers in a better perspective, how many people in the bottom 20% or in the top 20% in the U.S. are still there just 10 years later?
.
The Answer? Not very many. A quick Google for "income mobility" and the first link is http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/BG1418.cfm
Also, the "poverty line" in the U.S is the "super-wealthy line" for most of the world's population or even for the U.S. as little as 30-40 years ago.
"This time I'm voting Kerry for several reasons. He seems much more centrist, so hopefully he can unite the majorly partisan congress."
Ummmm.... you missed the part where Kerry has been rated the most liberal senator of them all, right?
Please, don't judge a politician on what they say to get elected in an election year, especially Kerry, who seems to change his public positions based on the wind and which state he's in.
Judge them on how they actually vote. By those standards, you probably like Kerry better (based on your expressed views), but he can in no way be called a "centrist".
There is a setting on your computer to tell it how fast to let you type.
Try Settings/Control Panel/Keyboard if you're using MS Windows.
He and Berger were just going out to lunch when it all originally happened. That gives him an alibi.
Naw, better to run Linux compatibility mode within a FreeBSD jail and then use UML inside that.
If that doesn't confuse the users and crackers alike, I don't know what will....